Author gregorlingl
Recipients belopolsky, eric.araujo, georg.brandl, glingl, gregorlingl, gvanrossum, ned.deily, r.david.murray, rhettinger, terry.reedy
Date 2010-10-27.18:37:39
SpamBayes Score 5.29549e-09
Marked as misclassified No
Message-id <1288204661.42.0.184844735996.issue10199@psf.upfronthosting.co.za>
In-reply-to
Content
Imho it is very important to clarify the name convention for demoscripts to be added to the demo before committing (or at least before the apperance of beta1). It decides about adding scripts to the Examples Menu of the viewer.

We all know, that things once they have found their way into Lib cannot be changed easily afterwards. Guidos argument on backwards compatibility applies. So now is the only point in time to decide about this.

Should we 
- stick with the tdemo_ prefix or 
- change to another pre- or postfix (like eg. bytedesign_demo)
- or should we allow for arbitrary *.py filenames with some exception (e.g. filenames that contain an underscore) to mark files that are not meant as demos for the viewer?

Please note that there are other constraints also for demo_files anyway, like the size of the graphics window and the presence of a main()-function to be called by the viewer. 

I'd like this to be decided actively. 

What do you think?
Best regards,
Gregor
History
Date User Action Args
2010-10-27 18:37:41gregorlinglsetrecipients: + gregorlingl, gvanrossum, georg.brandl, rhettinger, terry.reedy, glingl, belopolsky, ned.deily, eric.araujo, r.david.murray
2010-10-27 18:37:41gregorlinglsetmessageid: <1288204661.42.0.184844735996.issue10199@psf.upfronthosting.co.za>
2010-10-27 18:37:40gregorlingllinkissue10199 messages
2010-10-27 18:37:39gregorlinglcreate